canon rumors FORUM

DB

You can tell that it wasn't recorded separately, especially with the echo in the room plus the speakers voice is noticeably distant from the microphone.

If you intend recording a lot of interviews or live gigs/concerts, then buy a Zoom H4n or something like that, and record the audio separately. This is what TV stations do - even when they do capture sound + picture together, they usually over-dub in post-production.

Syncing later in post (e.g. in Adobe Premiere Pro of Final Cut Pro) is really very easy and the quality is 200% better. After all, why have a nice DSLR, lens etc. and cut corners on the 50% (audio) of the video that people really want.

You can record directly onto the Zoom (has 2 built in mic's that are really powerful) by placing it just out of shot or you can plug in a Rode Video mic or other 3.5mm jack plug mic + you can also plug in 2 x XLR mic's (what Pro's use) and use Lavalier (lapel mics) - one for the interviewer + the other for the interviewee (and these can be visible or concealed).

Once you switch over to recording sound separately as high quality audio (Zoom can record as 48KHz 24-bit .WAV files) you'll never go back, plus you can do a whole lot more in post with audio too using Adobe Audition or other software.

Logged

paul13walnut5

You need more seperation between the subject and the background. More Tele. Wide aperture.

This looks very video. DSLRS can do better, as can you. I don't mean to be harsh, but you asked for an opion. Read and practise my opening sentance. Even if you don't agree you'll at least be playing with perspective and depth of field.

I agree with advice so far, use something like a Zoom H4n so you can place the mic optimally which probably won't be near the camera or if budget limited maybe just use an extension cable on a mic and a small stand out of shot. Also agree the background is quite distracting and needs more seperation from the subject.

Anyway those are both largely technical issues with easy fixes, I liked the format of the video and the way it was edited together so think you've done pretty well overall

Logged

charliewphotos

Awesome advice thanks guys, I was space limited to a certain extent but next time I'll look to get a cleaner separation between subject and background. Also looking back the angle irks me so I'd change that. As I said my next investment is a rode mic. Video is decidedly secondary to stills for me at the moment so I'm not gonna bury alot of money into audio gear I'll rarely use but as a rode mic is about £80 I don't see why not (after payday!)

paul13walnut5

The Rode mic is okay for the cash. With any mic, positioning is key. On top of your camera in place of the built in mic is about 10% better.

Close to your subject, even into a recorder is better.

Audio usually means £££'s, but as you've stated that isn't your priority then maybe save the money from the robe and put it wowards one of the cheaper zooms, or tascams, something you can place close, just out of shot, the cheaper zooms (H1) still have fairly directional micing, even if they can't take pro mics, but perspective / placement is equally as important as the mic you use.

Synch the files in post.

Not by any means ideal, but as good as you'll get with your budget, and better than a camera top mic.